Honesty, integrity and pleading / putting allegations – UK Police Law Blog

‘The debate on whether there is a difference between honesty and integrity continues apace in Rhys Williams v Solicitors Regulatory Authority [2017] EWHC 1478 (Admin). I expressed my opinion here that there was a material difference between the two and that the decision of Mostyn J in Malins v Solicitors Regulatory Authority [2017] EWHC 835 (Admin), that the two were synonymous, was not correct – at least for the purposes of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012. The Divisional Court (the President of the QBD presiding) has now similarly deprecated it.’

Full Story

UK Police Law Blog, 21st June 2017

Source: ukpolicelawblog.com

An unsatisfactory situation – Tanfield Chambers

‘Since the Supreme Court turned the law of dispensation from the consultation requirements upside down in Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson [2013] UKSC 14; [2013] 2 EGLR 45, the Upper Tribunal has been troubled with very few cases involving the requirements to consult leaseholders on major works. However, the decision in Lessees of Foundling Court and O’Donnell Court v Camden London Borough Council and others [2016] UKUT 366 (LC); [2016] EGLR 59 has rewritten preconceptions as to who needs to be consulted and caused landlords some new headaches.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 12th June 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

Zimbabwean national unlawfully detained after Home Office fails to serve immigration decision – Free Movement

‘Substantial damages of £10,500 have been awarded to a claimant who was unlawfully detained for a period of 70 days. The Home Office had failed to serve the Claimant with notice of a decision on his application to vary his leave to remain in the UK before detaining him, rendering his detention unlawful. The case is R (on the application of) Godwin Chaparadza v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 1209 (Admin).’

Full Story

Free Movement, 7th June 2017

Source: www.freemovement.org.uk

Court of Appeal dismisses challenge to rules on Adult Dependent Relatives – Free Movement

Posted May 30th, 2017 in appeals, elderly, families, immigration, news, regulations by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has dismissed the challenge brought by campaign group Britcits to the restrictive Immigration Rules on the admission to the UK of parents, grandparents and other adult dependent relatives. The case is BRITCITS v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 368.’

Full Story

Free Movement, 30th May 2017

Source: www.freemovement.org.uk

UK law found to be more generous than EU law for jobseekers acquiring permanent residence – Free Movement

‘The case of GE v. SSWP (ESA) [2017] UKUT 145 (ACC) sets out how the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 (since replaced with the 2016 version), are in some areas, more generous than EU law itself by concluding that an initial right of residence or status as a job-seeker could count towards permanent residence for an EEA national.’

Full story

Free Movement, 22nd May 2017

Source: www.freemovement.org.uk

General Data Protection Regulation (GPDR) Series, Part 1 – introduction and overview – Technology Law Update

Posted May 10th, 2017 in data protection, EC law, news, regulations by sally

‘The General Data Protection Regulation (GPDR) (EU) 2016/679 of 27 April 2016 which comes into force in May 2018, will introduce major changes to the law on the processing of personal data in the European Union. Over the next ten months, several European Union and United States law firms we work very closely with will join us in providing you with more information on the GDPR. Different themes will be tackled month by month to help you prepare for the GDPR deadline.’

Full story

Technology Law Update, 8th May 2017

Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk

Implementing the GDPR in the UK: lessons from Germany? – Panopticon

Posted May 10th, 2017 in data protection, EC law, foreign jurisdictions, news, regulations by sally

‘As we all know, the GDPR is all about the harmonisation of data protection across Europe – hence its form as a regulation (directly effective) rather than a directive (domestic implementing legislation needed). Yes, but: the GDPR leaves an awful lot to member states to implement. For example: exemptions to data subjects’ rights, mechanisms for reconciling data protection and freedom of expression, and the machinery of enforcement by supervisory authorities. Until we have domestic implementing legislation, we can’t fully understand how data protection will work after 25 May 2018.’

Full story

Panopticon, 9th May 2017

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

The Tribunal unleashed – Nearly Legal

Posted April 28th, 2017 in appeals, benefits, housing, human rights, news, regulations by tracey

‘This was the DWP’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal of the First Tier Tribunal’s decision on the Carmichael’s bedroom tax appeal.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 27th April 2017

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/

EnergySolutions EU Ltd (now ATK Energy EU Ltd) v Nuclear Decommissioning Authority – WLR Daily

EnergySolutions EU Ltd (now ATK Energy EU Ltd) v Nuclear Decommissioning Authority [2017] UKSC 34

‘A company was unsuccessful in its bid in a tender process carried out by a public authority for a contract which fell within the ambit of Parliament and Council Directive 2004/18/EC (“the Public Procurement Directive”) and Council Directive 89/665/EEC , as amended, which provided for remedies for unsuccessful applicants (“the Remedies Directive”) and which had been given effect to in England and Wales by the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, as amended. The Regulations provided that, after notification of the contracting authority’s decision to award the contract, there would be a ten-day standstill period prior to the actual award of the contract during which time an unsuccessful bidder could issue proceedings to challenge the award. The issuing of proceedings would trigger automatic suspension of the contract award until the challenge was determined or otherwise disposed of, although the court had power to require a cross-undertaking from that party to cover the authority’s losses from not entering into the contract with its preferred bidder. Regulation 47D(2), as inserted, however, allowed for a period of 30 days for the issuing of any proceedings, with regulation 47J(2)(c), as inserted, making provision for an award of damages to the unsuccessful bidder if the court found a breach of duty after the contract had been entered into. The company, having been notified that it was an unsuccessful bidder, expressed its concerns with the procurement process but did not issue proceedings until after the expiry of the standstill period, albeit within the 30-day period. On a trial of preliminary issues, where the authority relied on Court of Justice authority which imposed minimum conditions for claims for breaches of an European Union law right, including that the breach had to be “sufficiently serious”, the judge stated that (i) there was nothing in the Remedies Directive which limited the company to recovery of damages on that basis, and (ii) ordinary principles of English law applied to any award of damages under the 2006 Regulations and so the Court of Justice’s rule would not limit the recovery of damages to “sufficiently serious” breaches of the 2006 Regulations. He declined to make any ruling on a third issue, whether the company’s failure to start proceedings within the standstill period and before the authority had entered into the contract meant that it was not entitled to damages, since it could have acted within the ten-day period to prevent the claimed loss from occurring by causing a suspension of the award of the contract to the successful bidder. On the authority’s appeal on the first two issues the Court of Appeal held that the minimum conditions for an award of damages for breach of an European Union law right had been established by the Court of Justice and so article 2(1)(c) of the Remedies Directive only called for an award of damages where the breach was sufficiently serious, but upheld the judge’s decision that there was no such constraint under the 2006 Regulations, and, on an appeal by the company on the third issue, accepted its submission that the judge ought to have decided as a matter of domestic law that it could not be deprived of damages simply because it had failed to avail itself of the opportunity under the 2006 Regulations to issue the proceedings in time to stop the contract being awarded. The authority appealed on the second and third issues, with the company arguing in relation to the first issue that damages could be awarded under article 2(1)(c) for any breach, whether serious or not. After the hearing the parties reached a settlement of the disputes between them in relation to liability and quantum but requested that the court hand down its judgment on the appeal in any event.’

WLR Daily, 11th April 2017

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust v Harland – WLR Daily

Tees Esk & Wear Valleys NHS Foundation Trust v Harland UKEAT/173/16

‘The claimants, nursing assistants, were employed by the trust as part of a designated team of 27 people providing specialist care to C, who had severe learning difficulties, in his flat. When C’s condition improved and fewer carers were needed to look after him the team was reduced to 11 people, who also provided care to other disabled people living in flats in the same building. The contract to provide care to C was subsequently taken over by a healthcare company and the trust nominated those members of the team who had spent the greatest proportion of their working time looking after C to transfer to the company. The claimants were unwilling to transfer and left to take other posts or were made redundant. On their complaints of unfair dismissal an employment judge considered as preliminary issues whether there was a relevant transfer within the meaning of regulation 3(1) of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 and whether the claimants had been assigned to an organised grouping of employees prior to the transfer, such that there had been a service provision change in accordance with regulation 3(1)(b). The tribunal found that the trust had initially put together an organised grouping of employees which included the claimants with the principal purpose of the care of C but as C recovered and the number of hours needed for his care was reduced the principal purpose of the group became subsidiary to the dominant purpose of providing care to other disabled people in the building and, accordingly, at the time of the transfer from the trust to the company the requirements of regulation 3(3)(a)(i) were not satisfied and there was no service provision change. The tribunal concluded that as there was no relevant transfer the claimants had been at all times employed by the trust.’

WLR Daily, 3rd March 2017

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

SRA attacks “disproportionate and unnecessary” money laundering regulations – Legal Futures

‘New anti-money laundering (AML) regulations planned by the Treasury would impose “disproportionate and unnecessary” burdens on law firms, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 20th April 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Tribunal lays out Clyde & Co’s “glaring” failures – Legal Futures

‘The failures which led to a record fine for Clyde & Co were “particularly glaring” as it was “a large and, previously, reputable firm”, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has declared in approving the sanction.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 19th April 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

How tobacco firms flout UK law on plain packaging – The Guardian

Posted April 10th, 2017 in brand names, health, news, regulations, smoking, whistleblowers by sally

‘An insider in the tobacco industry has revealed some of the unscrupulous tactics it is using to avoid new restrictions governing the marketing of cigarettes that come into force next month.’

Full story

The Guardian, 9th April 2017

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Jeremy Lewis on NHS Applicant Whistleblowers: wider implications and mis-steps en route – Littleton Chambers

Posted April 6th, 2017 in consultations, disclosure, employment, health, news, regulations, whistleblowers by sally

‘On 20 March 2017 the Government published draft Regulations with a view to providing whistleblowing protection to applicants for NHS employment [1]. A consultation has been launched. Some two years after the publication of the report by Sir Robert Francis QC into whistleblowing in NHS, Freedom to Speak Up, the draft Regulations aim to implement the recommendation that consideration be given to outlawing discrimination against whistleblowers in recruitment by NHS employers. (Legislation giving power to make these regulations – s.49B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 – has been on the statute book since 6 May 2015).’

Full story

Littleton Chambers, 21st March 2017

Source: www.littletonchambers.com

First ‘snapshot’ of gender pay gap due as reporting requirements come into force – OUT-LAW.com

Posted April 5th, 2017 in disclosure, employment, equal pay, news, Northern Ireland, regulations, statistics by sally

‘Large UK employers will begin publishing their gender pay gaps over the coming months, based on the pay which their employees receive within the pay period in which today’s date falls.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 5th April 2017

Source: www.out-law.com

Impact of Brexit on legal services “a cause for concern”, justice committee says – Legal Futures

‘The justice select committee has described the impact of Brexit on legal services as “a cause for concern, but not hyberbole”, in a report published today.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 22nd March 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Future-proof growth for the digital economy – Technology Law Update

Posted March 9th, 2017 in data protection, EC law, education, employment, news, regulations, reports by sally

‘Last year, the digital economy accounted for 14.5% of all UK service exports, at around £30bn. The UK remains a leader in digital innovation, and maintaining that status is a Government priority. Coadec, the Coalition for a Digital Economy, has released a detailed report suggesting four areas that for improvement to keep pace in the global race: skills, talent, investment and trade.’

Full story

Technology Law Update, 7th March 2017

Source: www.technology-law-blog.co.uk

Church liability: fall from ladder – Law & Religion UK

‘On 3 March 2017, the Court of Appeal (Civil) Division handed down the judgment in Casson v Hudson & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 125 in relation to a claim for damages following a fall from a ladder during the painting of a church hall. The case highlights the potential liabilities faced by incumbents and PCCs in relation to persons undertaking work on premises for which they are responsible.’

Full story

Law & Religion UK, 8th March 2017

Source: www.lawandreligionuk.com

HRA Claims and Concurrent Care Proceedings: Third Party Costs Orders, Statutory Charge Guidance and an Invitation to the Lord Chancellor – Family Law Week

‘Ben Mansfield, barrister of The 36 Group, examines the judgment of Mr Justice Keehan in H (A Minor) v Northamptonshire County Council and the Legal Aid Agency [2017] EWHC 282 (Fam).’

Full story

Family Law Week, 23rd February 2017

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Secession from the European Union and Private International Law: The Cloud with a Silver Lining – Blackstone Chambers

Posted February 21st, 2017 in EC law, international law, legislation, news, regulations, speeches, treaties by sally

‘In the last six months there have been lectures, seminars, evidence-givingsand-takings, reports issued, all over town, in which the future of commercial litigation in England has been discussed. It may not be completely true that these have as their object the utter immiseration of everyone within earshot, but that does appear to be the principal effect. Those who, like me, do not seem to be invited to such gatherings are at liberty to see things rather differently. We have a once-in-a generation opportunity to compare the rules of private international law which we currently have with what we might instead have, and to take stock. When that is done, the path ahead will be seen to be rather clearer and brighter than some others would tell you it is. One certainly hears people suggesting that secession from the European Union is going to have a damaging effect, but for our private international law the truth may well be otherwise. And while the need to deal with these tasks may be an un-looked-for interruption to normal work, for some of us the chance to ask questions challenges us to think about what we would like our rules of private international law to say. My conclusion will be that less will change than most seem to suppose (or, in some cases, seem to hope for). There will be minor changes, certainly, but need be nothing major; and if anything major does change, it will not be a change for the worse. In short, though I am very fearful of sounding like the Daily Mail in human form, private international law has no cause for alarm. I should perhaps say that a fuller and footnoted version of this paper will be available from the Combar website if anyone is interested.’

Full story (PDF)

Blackstone Chambers, 24th January 2017

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com